Agenda item

Proposal: Application to vary S106 agreement between South Somerset District Council and Melanie Anne Quantock Shuldham dated 11^th July 2014 relating to affordable housing.

The Section 106 Monitoring & Compliance Officer introduced the report and advised that the applicants were seeking to discharge the planning obligations within the s106 agreement on grounds of financial viability.  He confirmed that they had followed due process and the District Valuer had agreed that the scheme was currently unviable and so unable to deliver the obligations held within the agreement.  Therefore he recommended the application to modify the S106 agreement be approved.

Mr H Donovan, Vice Chairman of the Parish Council, voiced their strong objections to proposals.  He said there was a dire need for affordable housing in the village and the withdrawal of the leisure contributions would impact on several ongoing village facilities and projects. 

Mrs B Brooks, Chairman of the Parish Council, said that negotiation should have taken place on the planning obligations rather than discharge them.  Building works had already commenced and she felt the developers accountants had presented a worse case scenario to the District Valuer.

Mr O Marigold, on behalf of ARC Homes, said that since the purchase of the land the costs of building had increased and if the S106 was not changed then building would cease until the market returned.  He said that the company’s community fund would be made available and the review mechanism would ensure that if the market improved then the S106 could be reviewed again.

Ms W Lewis, on behalf of ARC Homes said this was potentially a loss making site for them.  Although all profits were used to build houses in other areas, their profit levels were nowhere near those of general builders. 

The Ward Member, Councillor Sylvia Seal, said the Parish Council were relying on the S106 money from the development to fund a new adventure playground and the loss of 6 affordable houses was not good for the community.  As the site was already under construction, the developer should stand by their S106 obligations.

During a short discussion, Members were unanimous in their opposition to the proposal to vary the S106 agreement.  They felt that the developer should have known the costs involved from the outset and as the development was already partly constructed they should keep to the original S106 agreement.  It was proposed and seconded to refuse the application and on being put to the vote, was carried unanimously.

(Voting: unanimous in favour)